In this poll, 52% say they would not vote for Hillary Clinton for president. Reading thru the comments, I found an excellent question:
Any idea where all those negatives come from? Stupid partisan comments that throw more heat than light are NOT welcome. I can see anti-war people having a beef with her. I can see Bill Clinton haters transferring the hate to her. Some people don’t like that she tried to reform health care (can’t understand why that is a problem). I think some of it may be people who don’t like women who aren’t in their place. Otherwise what gives — her positions and agenda are little different from the other Democrats?
Good question. And given how well she performed the other night, a valid one. So why do so many people – including Democrats – say that they absolutely will not vote for Hillary?
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Anon E. Mouse, if you think you really know who ANY of these people are, then allow me to quote you back at itself: your naivete is so cute. Leaving aside for the moment whether you can actually say you *know* Hillary Clinton based on unsubstantiated allegations made by special prosecutors and right-wing talk radio (and to be fair, that’s essentially what you’ve argued with your Vince Foster comment), do you REALLY think you know who George W. Bush is based on what you’ve read in the newspaper or what you’ve seen on CNN? Are the 60-plus percent of us who think unfavorably of him right in thinking he’s generally not a great guy? And if that’s true, how come we seemed to think so differently about him back in 2004? Does the news media somehow give you a special objective insight into the authentic and private nature of any human being in the political arena? Or do you think your perception of a person whom you’ve never met might be colored and distorted by the nature of the annecdotes and second-hand stories reported to you by intermediaries based on what those other people find interesting and note-worthy?
Hillary is simply trying to show a side of herself apart that you might not have gotten a chance to know by watching Fox News and which you probably won’t get a chance to see without spending a couple hours with her chatting over coffee. If you think that’s still inauthentic, fine. You’re a strong-unfavorable, and the campaign has rightly given up on your vote already. But please stop illustrating my earlier point by jumping at whatever is convenient as a justification for hating Hillary. You dislike her for irrational reasons, and that’s your perogative.
I have very rational reasons for disliking her. Those reasons culminate in the murder of Vince Foster, but he is not the sole reason. To put it in terms someone from Arkansas might appreciate, Clinton is as crooked as a dog’s hind leg.
…and the mouse rebounded with the same tired old discredited slander and dug a hole for itself under a rock. Living Stephen Colbert’s characterization of the extreme right – following your gut (however malignant) rather than your mind again Mouse.
Think.
We expect more from you and you should expect more from yourself.
Few have been subjected to more “investigations”/dirt digging than the Clinton’s and yet for all the millions spent (did I read the figure €60mill alone on investigating the Lewinsky affair – has anyone got a source?) the most they could find was that Bill was a bit of a womaniser.
FYI, Bill Clinton was impeached (the ONLY president to be legitimately impeached) for perjury, not adultery.
Hillary’s “finding” of the Rose Law Firm records, her support of Middle East terrorists such as Arafat, her attempt to socialize our health care, her avowed socialist leanings, and her move to New York for no other reason than to be a Senator, are but a few of the reasons I will never vote for her. Vince Foster is another.
Hmm. J is in Europe. Interesting. Perhaps unfortunate because it’s going to be assumed henceforth that he’s not an American, particularly because he has an excellent point.
Mouse, let’s start with point one of your very rational reason. What’s your evidence that she is, as you quaintly put it, “crooked?” From what case does that evidence come? What was the final disposition of that case?
What would probably be most compelling would be is if you break it down chronologically so we could get to the very root of the very rational reason you have for disliking Hillary. Maybe you could introspectively identify whether it was one event in particular or the aggregation of several events, culminating, as you say, in the alleged murder of Mr. Foster?
There is no point in my detailing all that went on with her “lost” law firm records and Foster’s death. It’s all online already. If you do ot believe it there, you will not believe it from me.
But this came from Clinton herself: she admits that she did not bother to read the intelligence reports before sending our soldiers to Iraq.
J is a she and yes, I’m European – I’m Irish.
I find US politics interesting…in Ireland all the politicians are roughly centre, some slightly to the left of centre others slightly to the right but the difference is so marginal as to be virtually negligible.
Of course while I prefer the above situation it makes debate less interesting…because we tend to agree on most issues.
Mouse, while you may think “it’s all out there,” the title of this post ought to indicate that a lot of people are pretty darned confused as to the nature of your particular beef. Help me out. I’m not a legal scholar. Although I am pretty sure that Bill Clinton was impeached for specific perjury charges directly related to whom he was or was not rogering. Oh, and I’m also pretty sure that Hillary Clinton, unlike Bill Clinton or Andrew Johnson, has never been impeached.
(cheers J! :))
The law Andrew Johnson was impeached for breaking was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. That leave Clinton standing alone. Anyway, j brought it up, not I.
I have already mentioned several “beefs” I have with HRC. Do you need more? Does one have to be convicted to be crooked? Does one have to be convicted to be considered too dirty for public office?
Considering Rep. Jefferson, the answer seems to be “yes,” at least for Democrats.
“Does one have to be convicted to be crooked?” Not in my eyes. I will admit that some democrats unfortunately might say yes in regard to some democratic politicians, just as many republicans cheered for Tom DeLay whose good name was cleared when one of the charges against him was dropped (but not racketeering or money laundering, which would still make him basically a mobster). And we’ll leave aside for the moment the republicans who think I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby should be pardoned–and he WAS convicted.
No, we’ll stick to the meat of your question. While one need not have been convicted of a crime to be crooked, there does need to be evidence to convict someone of committing a crime (such as Jefferson’s freezer full of cash), and likewise there usually has to be evidence for someone to be able to assert truthfully that another person is guilty or crooked. I’m pretty sure Jefferson’s guilty because of all that cash in his ice box. Like the rest of America, I was basically forced to sit and listen to all the evidence against OJ, and I’m pretty sure he did it, too. What’s the compelling body of evidence that supports your claim that Hillary is crooked and that you are not, in fact, just a left-wing-conspiracy theorist?
anonymous –
Before you waste a few more minutes of your life that you’ll never get back, please consider whether you may be arguing with the same Anon E. Mouse who yearns for the good old days of the Dust Bowl, when there was no Social Security, Medicaid, or Medicare, and who would vote for Herbert Hoover if only he were still running for President:
https://blog.vivianpaige.com/2007/05/21/massive-misery/#comments
I’m thinking Mouse is not about to vote for Richardson. GinGrinch, maybe, but not Richardson. This is no Democrat.
Nope, I’m no Democrat, which is the same as a Socialist, but only Bernie Sanders has the guts to admit it.
However, I am a Virginian, which entitles me to vote in the Democratic Primary. Richardson is by far the most qualified candidate, from either party, which means, of course, that he will never win the Democratic Primary!
VAB,
This is a social experiment for me. I’m not trying to persuade Mouse to vote for Hillary (after all, I’m not voting for her, either). I’m trying to plumb the depths to which one will go in constructing a world-view that suits her impression in order to tell herself that her world-view is impression is justified by her world-view. Is the world-view a series of simple rationalizations, or is a series of complicated constructs? What color is the sky there? My impression is that she can’t articulate it to me because she can’t articulate it to herself, which I suspect means it’s not a complicated construct. Which is kind of fascinating when you think about it.
Well, Anonymous, to that I say – diver down!
Have fun.
You go, anonymous 😉